|
Does anyone remember the old Dungeons & Dragons saturday morning cartoon? Do you remember the character of the 'Cavalier?' Bumbling, selfish, useless, cowardly, sniveling. I wonder if that's what WotC was going for with the 3.0/3.5 paladin.
At that time, my favorite character class was the Cavalier from Unearthed Arcana.
Those that want to play restrictionless reckless damage dealers - let them play fighters....but then let them see what can truly be special with a lot of discipline and alot of faith. Let them say, "I knew I should have listened to my priest and become a paladin....."
Amen, Brother
|
Does anyone remember the old Dungeons & Dragons saturday morning cartoon? Do you remember the character of the 'Cavalier?' Bumbling, selfish, useless, cowardly, sniveling. I wonder if that's what WotC was going for with the 3.0/3.5 paladin.
Hey, Eric was the only one who saw through that evil little gnome-guy!
"Oh, dearie-me, it seems I can't send you home after all..."
"LIAR!!!!"
<smite!>
|
Does anyone remember the old Dungeons & Dragons saturday morning cartoon? Do you remember the character of the 'Cavalier?' Bumbling, selfish, useless, cowardly, sniveling. I wonder if that's what WotC was going for with the 3.0/3.5 paladin.Hey, Eric was the only one who saw through that evil little gnome-guy!
"Oh, dearie-me, it seems I can't send you home after all..."
"LIAR!!!!"
<smite!>
Congrats you missed and used up your 1 smite for the day :P
|
Not to be bashing the Paladin. But if I were fighting demons or devils, I would rather be a high level Ranger with Favoured Enemy than a Paladin. It's nothing personal, I just think the ranger would be better, and that's wrong, seeing as demons and devils should be what the Paladin should be best at fighting at higher levels.I suggested giving Favoured Enemy to the Paladin. It's always 'on', and it sets him up for a bunch of other feats/PrC.
It's a tried & tested mechanic, and it won't take up more than a couple of lines ("see Ranger, page XX").
Maybe FE:Undead, at lower levels, so he can hack through skels and zombies, with FE: Evil Outsider kicking in later?
My similar suggestions were what amounts to "favored enemy (evil)" at half the value of a ranger's FavEn, or that a specific use of "smite evil" would give the bane quality to a weapon for a round (or CHA bonus # of rounds) or some such.
Perhaps FavEn (evil outsider) would work just fine, with the stipulation that it also applied to any fiendish or half-fiend creature. While you don't meet too many true outsiders at low levels, if you run up against evil Clr/Sor/Wiz you have a pretty good chance at them using summon monster to bring in a fiendish whatzit or three that you could use the ability against.
Like everyone else, I'll look forward to seeing the in medias res paladin revision.
Instead of favored enemy, why not have Smite Evil work in a similar fashion? Have Smite Evil be "always on" but only effective against a paladin's true enemies, Evil Outsiders and the Undead. This scales well with the increase in levels, fits the paladin's flavor, and relies on his primary stat, Charisma. The damage may need to be toned down, say "+1 for every two levels, minimum +1" that we see on so many of the domains? This way, when confronted with the Vrock or Devourer, the Paladin truely comes to the foreground, while the Barbarian/Fighter/Ranger shines against the orcish horde.
I love the paladin class, and have faith that Jason and crew will make her shine for all of us.
Ryn, who smites the darkness
|
Instead of favored enemy, why not have Smite Evil work in a similar fashion? Have Smite Evil be "always on" but only effective against a paladin's true enemies, Evil Outsiders and the Undead. This scales well with the increase in levels, fits the paladin's flavor, and relies on his primary stat, Charisma. The damage may need to be toned down, say "+1 for every two levels, minimum +1" that we see on so many of the domains? This way, when confronted with the Vrock or Devourer, the Paladin truely comes to the foreground, while the Barbarian/Fighter/Ranger shines...
Because then the paladin sucks even worse when dealing with the general evils of the world, remember smite is his only offensive capability, if you tone down the damage and make it only work against evil outsiders and undead then the problem of being an NPC warrior become 10 fold unless you are specifically playing the paladin in hell campaign. I know in my game I would've have only had a smite in the last session, that means 2 levels where I sucked even worse class feature wise than I suck class feature wise now.
|
|
My posts have sounded especially negative of late so I just wanted to add this caveat:
Jason says he'll have a re-write posted on monday I am very looking forward after the coolness that was his barbarian re-write.
I blame the paladins continued low level suckiness not on Jason failing, but on Jason being to rushed to get all the Alpha/Beta material released. Since he couldn't really take the time to focus on the Paladins needs he just added some abilities to see how they played with folks and now that he has time I'm hoping that the paladin will get the attention it deserves.
Jason says he'll have a re-write posted on monday I am very looking forward after the coolness that was his barbarian re-write.
Is this official? and any idea where we will find it once it is posted?
My posts have sounded especially negative of late so I just wanted to add this caveat:
Jason says he'll have a re-write posted on monday I am very looking forward after the coolness that was his barbarian re-write.
I blame the paladins continued low level suckiness not on Jason failing, but on Jason being to rushed to get all the Alpha/Beta material released. Since he couldn't really take the time to focus on the Paladins needs he just added some abilities to see how they played with folks and now that he has time I'm hoping that the paladin will get the attention it deserves.
Heh... this is one nice thing about the new structure for the Beta playtest versus the Alpha. Under the Beta he's more or less forced to really look at a very small portion of the rules for 2 weeks solid.
The result for the barbarian rage powers was highly encouraging. The ranger... well not so much, but I don't think we've seen the final version of the ranger yet.
Jason has also more or less said that the Paladin's mount is going to be more like the animal companions and that (I hope) both the ranger and the Paladin's companion/ mount will be at level-3 instead of the current 1/2 level the ranger has which is a nice win.
Smite? I guess we'll see. On the char last night Jason said one thing that would likely *not* happen is smite being merged with anything else.
If Smite Evil is a X/day power then it should be at least as powerful as the rogues sneak attack. I would be Ok with the paladin losing it when he misses IF it gave a significant bonus to hit. So maybe +2 to hit and 1d6 / 2 levels damage. Heck the barbarian is gaining 1d6 bonus damage from elemental damage or bite attacks... likely 50% of the time.
|
|
Does anyone remember the old Dungeons & Dragons saturday morning cartoon? Do you remember the character of the 'Cavalier?' Bumbling, selfish, useless, cowardly, sniveling. I wonder if that's what WotC was going for with the 3.0/3.5 paladin.
jajaja hey hey don't mess with Erik... that is because in the 80's they have thepolitic of howing atleast one of those characters to show people how things should not be done
i think the closest to a paladin was a warrior in a prison with golden armor and hammer who had lost faith
|
|
If Smite Evil is a X/day power then it should be at least as powerful as the rogues sneak attack. I would be Ok with the paladin losing it when he misses IF it gave a significant bonus to hit. So maybe +2 to hit and 1d6 / 2 levels damage. Heck the barbarian is gaining 1d6 bonus damage from elemental damage or bite attacks... likely 50% of the time.
Umm you do realize that in most cases a smite only giving +2 to hit is actually a nerf right? My 4 level pally gets a +3 to hit with smite as it is, I'm assuming you meant a +20 to hit or something.
|
|
Is this official? and any idea where we will find it once it is posted?
Jason says he'll have a re-write posted on monday I am very looking forward after the coolness that was his barbarian re-write.
Sorry I misinterpreted what he wrote on this thread, he said over the week and I'll post when it's ready, I took that to mean that it'd be ready next week, my bad sorry to get your hopes up.
Umm you do realize that in most cases a smite only giving +2 to hit is actually a nerf right? My 4 level pally gets a +3 to hit with smite as it is, I'm assuming you meant a +20 to hit or something.
If Smite Evil is a X/day power then it should be at least as powerful as the rogues sneak attack. I would be Ok with the paladin losing it when he misses IF it gave a significant bonus to hit. So maybe +2 to hit and 1d6 / 2 levels damage. Heck the barbarian is gaining 1d6 bonus damage from elemental damage or bite attacks... likely 50% of the time.
I meant +2 more yeah, that's what I meant...
Actually for some reason I thought smite was a damage only bonus. No I didn't mean +20. (*Ogre quickly rereads the class features*) While CHA to hit is nice because it stacks with all the rest of the paladin's CHA based abilities it's still kind of underwhelming.
Bad Ogre, no donut.
|
Contributor, RPG Superstar 2008 Top 4, Legendary Games
|
Umm you do realize that in most cases a smite only giving +2 to hit is actually a nerf right? My 4 level pally gets a +3 to hit with smite as it is, I'm assuming you meant a +20 to hit or something.
If Smite Evil is a X/day power then it should be at least as powerful as the rogues sneak attack. I would be Ok with the paladin losing it when he misses IF it gave a significant bonus to hit. So maybe +2 to hit and 1d6 / 2 levels damage. Heck the barbarian is gaining 1d6 bonus damage from elemental damage or bite attacks... likely 50% of the time.I meant +2 more yeah, that's what I meant...
Actually for some reason I thought smite was a damage only bonus. No I didn't mean +20. (*Ogre quickly rereads the class features*) While CHA to hit is nice because it stacks with all the rest of the paladin's CHA based abilities it's still kind of underwhelming.
Bad Ogre, no donut.
Amusingly, the "smite evil" ability that creatures with the celestial template have IS just a bonus to damage, no bonus to hit.
Perhaps this would be another nice spot to create some uniformity in how the ability works for both PCs and monsters who get the same abilities.
Still, I wouldn't mind a smaller bonus to hit if the bonus to damage were ramped up quite a bit. (and really, 1d6/2 levels isn't a catastrophic power increase. At 20th level it's 35 damage vs. 20, which is nice but not overwhelming, and it has the caveat of not multiplying on a crit, though it seems like a lot of HL encounters are crit-immune anyway)
Am I the only person in the world who can care less about unifying powers, I understand the benefit of reduced bookeeping but maybe it's just the way I prepare things that it's not an issue for me. anywho just a random thought.What is Smite?
- "Smite" grants a creature +1 HP damage per HD on attack rolls
- "Smite" grants a creature +1 HP damage per HD on attack rolls and allows a creature to add his Charisma to his attack roll
The correct answer both. So WTF? Maybe uniformity is the wrong word here, consistency? The reason I was confused above is because I run monsters more than paladins so when I hear 'smite' I think of the monster template not the paladin class feature. If I hear 'smite' it should be one thing, not two nearly identical things that are slightly different depending on context.
As for other aspects of uniformity... that's a different discussion.
|
|
Am I the only person in the world who can care less about unifying powers, I understand the benefit of reduced bookeeping but maybe it's just the way I prepare things that it's not an issue for me. anywho just a random thought.What is Smite?
- "Smite" grants a creature +1 HP damage per HD on attack rolls
- "Smite" grants a creature +1 HP damage per HD on attack rolls and allows a creature to add his Charisma to his attack roll
The correct answer both. So WTF? Maybe uniformity is the wrong word here, consistency? The reason I was confused above is because I run monsters more than paladins so when I hear 'smite' I think of the monster template not the paladin class feature. If I hear 'smite' it should be one thing, not two nearly identical things that are slightly different depending on context.
As for other aspects of uniformity... that's a different discussion.
Oh, don't get me wrong, I understand where you guys are coming from. After all I had the same issue earlier when you were discussing the merits of giving a paladin a druids AC, I thought you meant armor class and you meant Animal Companion. I know that having a mechanic that has the same name mean different things can be confusing. But with me I just usually make sure when I'm playing (not on the forums) to double check the relevant ability in regards to who is using it before play begins, not look for the general description so I rarely have those issues at a game table. As such unification while nice for the forums, is irrelevant to me in play and I could care less, s'all I'm saying.
I'm not sure if anyone else has thought of this, but I just wanted to put in my two cents worth. My first post here, by the way! I was introduced to PF through a friend of mine, and am very strongly considering converting 3.5 to PF when I run the Drow War campaign put out by Mongoose. Anywho...
In the last (huge!) campaign I played in where a friend of mine was DMing, I ended up playing a character that I felt had very strong potential for some serious role-playing - a half-drow Paladin. It really gave me an opportunity to flesh out and give real personality to a character and, though I wish that my DM had done more to play up the animosity and suspicion pretty much every civilized race would have to someone who looks drow-ish, I had a good time playing him. I think, out of all the characters I've played, the Paladin was the most fun role-playing (not roll-playing) experience I've had. I really had the opportunity to step forward and play a character who was the embodiment of all things righteous and holy, which works for me very well. All my friends have said that if real-life were like a D&D game, I'd be the Paladin!
Anyway, on to my point...I don't know if anyone here is familiar with it, but there is a PrC in the Book of Exalted Deeds called the Fist of Raziel which has some very interesting applications. Specifically, they are focused on the smite evil class ability. They get magic circle against evil as a constant aura effect, similar to the aura of good; I can see where a circle effect might be too strong for a base class, but I don't think a constant (or at-will) protection effect would be a bad thing. In addition, the smites of the Fist gained new special abilities as he leveled up, from considering the weapon good for DR to auto-confirming a smite threat to the weapon being considered holy to ultimately chain smiting, where the smite is so powerful that it effects multiple creatures with one blow.
I will also say, though, that I do believe Paladin's need some form of constant offensive boost vs. evil. I mean, the ONLY thing that kept my Paladin really trucking on along when we were fighting Balor after Balor at epic levels was the fact that our DM allowed me to burn action points (we used them in the campaign) to gain extra uses of my smite per day. If not for that, poor Alexander would've been like all other Paladins I've heard mention of, relegated to the realm of poor man's Fighter; given that it has been stated that they want to avoid increasing the number of uses a Paladin gets of smiting per day, it seems to me that they could maybe compensate by adding some additional effect to the smite each time the Paladin gains a new use of it per day, similar to the PrC I mentioned. Or, in a manner similar to the modified Barbarian Rage, give the Paladin a list of special abilities to choose from when smiting evil, or something along those lines.
Anyway, I suppose that my ultimate point was just to reference the Fist of Raziel PrC in BoED. I hadn't seen it mentioned yet, and it turned out to be quite a neat PrC for my half-drow Paly. I figured it couldn't hurt to bring it up.
I don't know if anyone here is familiar with it, but there is a PrC in the Book of Exalted Deeds called the Fist of Raziel which has some very interesting applications.
A nice PrC indeed. I think adapting some of the improvements regarding the smite ability would point into the right direction.
I really don't remember who proposed this (there are lots of comments on Paladins... perhaps it was on one of the many posts on Smite Evil ?), but why don't give Paladins some bonus Combat Feats (perhaps every 4 or 5 levels) ? Of course, they are not Fighters and some feats would still be off-limits for them (the Weapon Specialization chain, and the new "Fighter only" feats that Jason is thinking of), but at least they would have some of the possibilities that Rangers (for example) already take.
While I'm posting this, I am thinking: what about a fixed list of bonus feats (like the Ranger and the Monk) that include some Combat Feats and some (Paizonian)Divine Feats to choose among (perhaps Extra Turning and Selective Channeling among these)? That would make Paladins a more "martial" class - some people complain that we are focusing only on the Divine aspect of the Paladin's portfolio (like spells, LOH, and SE), but they are really holy WARRIORS, not merely HOLY warriors... and some combat options wouldn't hurt them at all.
For the guy who first proposed something like this: good idea (sorry I cannot find your post anymore...)!
|
|
An argument could be made that the paladin should be more likely to qualify for Weapon Focus/Spec, due to the whole 'deity's favoured weapon' angle.
Of course, they're not particularly great feats; how about granting them for free?
(Yes, I know that that would make half the paladins in Golarion archers, but I think the churches could relax that a little, to offer at least one melee choice, and one ranged?)
I don't have any particular suggestions to fixing the paladin. Honestly, I haven't been playing DnD very long and I still get rules mixed up a lot, so I don't really have a firm enough grasp on them to say "this is how I think it should be." I can say this, however. I was really excited to play a paladin in the Second Darkness campaign I'm in, but now it's become a bit of a disappointment. We are a third-level party right now. Three PC's--one wizard, one rogue, and one paladin. I need to be able to be the party's primary fighter and healer. I suck at both. The rogue does more damage than me most of the time. I have one smite evil per day and more often than not I miss and it's waisted. I don't have channel energy yet or any spells, so the only healing I can do is lay on hands. I get six of those per day and can only heal three hit points at a time. The things we're now fighting deal much more damage than that in one hit and we have to back out of combat and recoup quite often, spending money on heal spells at the local tavern/temple to Cayden Calean.
So while I can't really say how to fix what's wrong with the Paladin, I can certainly say "this is what sucks." I do not like the fact that I struggle to do as much damage as the rogue when I should be a decent fighter. I do not like the fact that I can't heal my party (or myself) beyond stabilizing them when they go down as that's all lay on hands seems to be good for at this point. I do not like the fact that I get one smite a day and more often than not lose it because I miss on that one roll. I was expecting the Paladin to be a tough, evil smiting, monster killing machine. Instead I'm a damage sponge who can't do anything useful accept take the hits that would otherwise go to the other two. This is a very boring roll to fall into.
|
|
I don't have any particular suggestions to fixing the paladin. Honestly, I haven't been playing DnD very long and I still get rules mixed up a lot, so I don't really have a firm enough grasp on them to say "this is how I think it should be." I can say this, however. I was really excited to play a paladin in the Second Darkness campaign I'm in, but now it's become a bit of a disappointment. We are a third-level party right now. Three PC's--one wizard, one rogue, and one paladin. I need to be able to be the party's primary fighter and healer. I suck at both. The rogue does more damage than me most of the time. I have one smite evil per day and more often than not I miss and it's waisted. I don't have channel energy yet or any spells, so the only healing I can do is lay on hands. I get six of those per day and can only heal three hit points at a time. The things we're now fighting deal much more damage than that in one hit and we have to back out of combat and recoup quite often, spending money on heal spells at the local tavern/temple to Cayden Calean.
So while I can't really say how to fix what's wrong with the Paladin, I can certainly say "this is what sucks." I do not like the fact that I struggle to do as much damage as the rogue when I should be a decent fighter. I do not like the fact that I can't heal my party (or myself) beyond stabilizing them when they go down as that's all lay on hands seems to be good for at this point. I do not like the fact that I get one smite a day and more often than not lose it because I miss on that one roll. I was expecting the Paladin to be a tough, evil smiting, monster killing machine. Instead I'm a damage sponge who can't do anything useful accept take the hits that would otherwise go to the other two. This is a very boring roll to fall into.
Hey did I just create a whole new persona and post a playtest report, that sounds so creepily familiar that I'm freaking out a bit.
Hate to tell you this, but prepare for a disapointment when you get channeling. You channel as a first level cleric. which means you'll heal 3 damage a pop on average. Granted if you waste a feat on selective channeling and never fight a group of more than 4 living monsters you'll be able to heal just every ally for 3 so it'll be a total of six, but you'll still have wasted a standard action and a feat to do so. Oh also the # of smites you get a day has been reduced from 3.5s 3+cha mod a day, to the new beta 1+cha mod a day because paladin channel energy was just too powerful for a fourth level ability, and needed to be nerfed.
And don't forget that your spellcasting is like a second level clerics. which means that you waited 3 levels more to get class features that are weaker than a first level cleric. Hell honestly you'd be better off taking cleric level 1 than paladin level 4, and you'd get the exact same things, plus two domains. Hey maybe you should see if your DM would let you swap that level. and still progress at level 5 as if you never took a level of cleric in exchange for dropping the domains. then you could also have cantrips.
I just blacked out what happened, oh wow, I just went off on another 4th level paladin is a waste of paper rant didn't I?
Lastknight...I think you meant LoH when you were referring to 3.5 having 3+char mod uses and PF having 1+Char mod uses...
Also I do have to agree, this post is another confirmation of everything you have been saying all along!
An argument could be made that the paladin should be more likely to qualify for Weapon Focus/Spec, due to the whole 'deity's favoured weapon' angle.
Of course, they're not particularly great feats; how about granting them for free?
(Yes, I know that that would make half the paladins in Golarion archers, but I think the churches could relax that a little, to offer at least one melee choice, and one ranged?)
To be totally honest this is not a bad idea at all! If the paladin could gain the whole weapon focus/specialization tree with their deity's favored weapon that would be a HUGE help.
Just give them Weapon focus at lvl 1, spec at 4, greater focus at 8 and greater spec at 12.
I dont know if this solves the "paladins should have an always on holy damage ability" but man it sure does help their combat abilities!!
I am on board with this and I think it is a GREAT! idea.
I still think that they should gain some bonus paladin feats (maybe one every 4 or 5 lvls, nothing like the fighter) but the weapon focus/spec stuff with the favored weapon should be a given!
|
|
Lastknight...I think you meant LoH when you were referring to 3.5 having 3+char mod uses and PF having 1+Char mod uses...
LoH changed from a pool divisible any way you wanted throughout the day to several small healing bursts in a day that weren't worth doing.
see the thread I linked to, I was talking about Channel energy.
|
|
An argument could be made that the paladin should be more likely to qualify for Weapon Focus/Spec, due to the whole 'deity's favoured weapon' angle.
Of course, they're not particularly great feats; how about granting them for free?
(Yes, I know that that would make half the paladins in Golarion archers, but I think the churches could relax that a little, to offer at least one melee choice, and one ranged?)
To be totally honest this is not a bad idea at all! If the paladin could gain the whole weapon focus/specialization tree with their deity's favored weapon that would be a HUGE help.
Just give them Weapon focus at lvl 1, spec at 4, greater focus at 8 and greater spec at 12.
I dont know if this solves the "paladins should have an always on holy damage ability" but man it sure does help their combat abilities!!
I am on board with this and I think it is a GREAT! idea.
I still think that they should gain some bonus paladin feats (maybe one every 4 or 5 lvls, nothing like the fighter) but the weapon focus/spec stuff with the favored weapon should be a given!
I'm fine with giving them these feats at the appropriate level but can we please drop the "your gods" caveat. I'm sorry it hurts people who play non-religeous paladins which is entirely possible in 3.5
Lastknight...I think you meant LoH when you were referring to 3.5 having 3+char mod uses and PF having 1+Char mod uses...
LoH changed from a pool divisible any way you wanted throughout the day to several small healing bursts in a day that weren't worth doing.
see the thread I linked to, I was talking about Channel energy.
no no, I meant because in your original post you said "smites" instead of LOH...
I'm fine with giving them these feats at the appropriate level but can we please drop the "your gods" caveat. I'm sorry it hurts people who play non-religeous paladins which is entirely possible in 3.5An argument could be made that the paladin should be more likely to qualify for Weapon Focus/Spec, due to the whole 'deity's favoured weapon' angle.
Of course, they're not particularly great feats; how about granting them for free?
(Yes, I know that that would make half the paladins in Golarion archers, but I think the churches could relax that a little, to offer at least one melee choice, and one ranged?)
To be totally honest this is not a bad idea at all! If the paladin could gain the whole weapon focus/specialization tree with their deity's favored weapon that would be a HUGE help.
Just give them Weapon focus at lvl 1, spec at 4, greater focus at 8 and greater spec at 12.
I dont know if this solves the "paladins should have an always on holy damage ability" but man it sure does help their combat abilities!!
I am on board with this and I think it is a GREAT! idea.
I still think that they should gain some bonus paladin feats (maybe one every 4 or 5 lvls, nothing like the fighter) but the weapon focus/spec stuff with the favored weapon should be a given!
I agree that is possible but why should there not be some advantage to picking a god? I like the idea that you dont have to but that further limits you so there should be an advantage.
|
|
no no, I meant because in your original post you said "smites" instead of LOH...Lastknight...I think you meant LoH when you were referring to 3.5 having 3+char mod uses and PF having 1+Char mod uses...
LoH changed from a pool divisible any way you wanted throughout the day to several small healing bursts in a day that weren't worth doing.
see the thread I linked to, I was talking about Channel energy.
You mean because I said smites instead of channel energy uses. Damn, I didn't even catch that and now it's too late to edit,
In my rant I meant channel energy for any instance that I said Smite when talking about level 4 abilities.
|
|
I agree that is possible but why should there not be some advantage to picking a god? I like the idea that you dont have to but that further limits you so there should be an advantage.I'm fine with giving them these feats at the appropriate level but can we please drop the "your gods" caveat. I'm sorry it hurts people who play non-religeous paladins which is entirely possible in 3.5An argument could be made that the paladin should be more likely to qualify for Weapon Focus/Spec, due to the whole 'deity's favoured weapon' angle.
Of course, they're not particularly great feats; how about granting them for free?
(Yes, I know that that would make half the paladins in Golarion archers, but I think the churches could relax that a little, to offer at least one melee choice, and one ranged?)
To be totally honest this is not a bad idea at all! If the paladin could gain the whole weapon focus/specialization tree with their deity's favored weapon that would be a HUGE help.
Just give them Weapon focus at lvl 1, spec at 4, greater focus at 8 and greater spec at 12.
I dont know if this solves the "paladins should have an always on holy damage ability" but man it sure does help their combat abilities!!
I am on board with this and I think it is a GREAT! idea.
I still think that they should gain some bonus paladin feats (maybe one every 4 or 5 lvls, nothing like the fighter) but the weapon focus/spec stuff with the favored weapon should be a given!
Because you aren't talking about the difference between just weapon focus or not weapon focus, you are talking about the difference of four feats spread out over several levels. This isn't an advantage for choosing a god, it's a shoehorn into choosing a god. Think about the comparison between a level 12 paladin of Iomedae in your system and a level 12 paladin of chivalry. You can't say a whole suite of abilities is based off of having a god unless the class requires that you have a god.
Also there has been this big debate as to whether a paladin should be more of a HOLY warrior, or more of a holy WARRIOR. I've never seen them as either, to me they've always been RIGHTEOUS WARRIORS. If anything a man who puts serving the cause of good over the dictates of some gods whims is the one who should have more power, not vise versa.
|
|
Shameful, my one smite missed, and I was mr NPC warrior while the knight was using his feature to the max benefit.
Hey, at least you got to attempt a smite!
I'm letting a player test a PF paladin, and he never got to use his smite while he was level 1. Animals, vermin & constructs; then the first actually evil creature jumped the party, the round after he'd been KO'd by an elemental.
Oh, the irony.
Wow, thanx I needed that laugh.
He got his first smite off last night!
Whoo Hoo!
Party now level 2.
Paladin and scout on watch, Detect Evil firing off every round (gaah!), because they know a rival group are on their trail.
Enemy wizard casts Sleep on the watchers (from outside detect range). Both fail (uh-oh!).
However, the scout has a 'friendly' ghost, whose hitched a ride in his head, and keeps him awake, to face a grilling by invisible rivals, while their pet ghoul sits watch over the sleeping party.
Ghost slaps the paladin around, enters his head and shouts "SMITE!". Paladin wakes up, looks straight into the eyes of the surprised ghoul, grabs his sword. Roll initiative, beat ghoul by one, and swings, as it leaps for his throat...and hacks it!
He'd taken a feat to make his smites good, and +d6 damage, so he totally slaughtered it!
The cheer went out around the table, and then Merry Hell commenced!
|
|
Shameful, my one smite missed, and I was mr NPC warrior while the knight was using his feature to the max benefit.Hey, at least you got to attempt a smite!
I'm letting a player test a PF paladin, and he never got to use his smite while he was level 1. Animals, vermin & constructs; then the first actually evil creature jumped the party, the round after he'd been KO'd by an elemental.
Oh, the irony.Wow, thanx I needed that laugh.He got his first smite off last night!
Whoo Hoo!
Party now level 2.
Paladin and scout on watch, Detect Evil firing off every round (gaah!), because they know a rival group are on their trail.Enemy wizard casts Sleep on the watchers (from outside detect range). Both fail (uh-oh!).
However, the scout has a 'friendly' ghost, whose hitched a ride in his head, and keeps him awake, to face a grilling by invisible rivals, while their pet ghoul sits watch over the sleeping party.
Ghost slaps the paladin around, enters his head and shouts "SMITE!". Paladin wakes up, looks straight into the eyes of the surprised ghoul, grabs his sword. Roll initiative, beat ghoul by one, and swings, as it leaps for his throat...and hacks it!
He'd taken a feat to make his smites good, and +d6 damage, so he totally slaughtered it!
The cheer went out around the table, and then Merry Hell commenced!
Great story, too bad it would have been totally different if he had been forced to stick with Core only like some playtesters do, woulda changed that story quite a bit. Paladin hits with his smite, game continues as if nothing ever happened :)
|
|
An argument could be made that the paladin should be more likely to qualify for Weapon Focus/Spec, due to the whole 'deity's favoured weapon' angle.
Of course, they're not particularly great feats; how about granting them for free?
(Yes, I know that that would make half the paladins in Golarion archers, but I think the churches could relax that a little, to offer at least one melee choice, and one ranged?)
To be totally honest this is not a bad idea at all! If the paladin could gain the whole weapon focus/specialization tree with their deity's favored weapon that would be a HUGE help.
Just give them Weapon focus at lvl 1, spec at 4, greater focus at 8 and greater spec at 12.
I dont know if this solves the "paladins should have an always on holy damage ability" but man it sure does help their combat abilities!!
I am on board with this and I think it is a GREAT! idea.
I still think that they should gain some bonus paladin feats (maybe one every 4 or 5 lvls, nothing like the fighter) but the weapon focus/spec stuff with the favored weapon should be a given!
Hey great! This is what I have been going for with my comments for some time now. I have a big BUT here though :-)
As I've said elsewhere, don't limit this to Deity's Favored Weapon. That is too boring. Just looking at LG gods, there are three in PF, all of your paladins will have either long bow, long sword or warhammer. Just let any paladin select a melee weapon to be their weapon of choice. They get to choose one weapon that will then suck up the equivalent of four feats over 12 levels. Does it matter that it is a deity's favored weapon? why limit it to that? Clerics emulate their god, paladins have a job to do. I want to see paladins with a variety of weapons otherwise we'll just have long sword wielding pally's. Boring.
Agreed when I was thinking up character concepts to play I had an idea of a paladin that always brought his quarry in alive. He was going to wield a saps and nets, in the end I decided to make a half-orc because I had never seen a half-orc paladin before and also wanted to move past the whole child of rape convention in my character (his orc mother and human father loved each other and were even married, the story is pretty good if I say so myself). but neither the paladin I'm playing now, or the concept I seriously considered would be able to benefit from either the divine bond or the bonus feats you guys are talking about because I choose to make interesting and original characters. I'm starting to feel like people want their fantasy very vanilla mechanically.
|
|
Just let any paladin select a melee weapon to be their weapon of choice. They get to choose one weapon that will then suck up the equivalent of four feats over 12 levels. Does it matter that it is a deity's favored weapon? why limit it to that?
I second this. A paladin should not be restricted in their choice of weapon.
Nor should a character be penalised for gaining a feat or class ability twice. If the character already has Weapon Focus (deity's favoured weapon) from another source, they should have a free choice of a second weapon.
I don't think the Church of Iomedae will excommunicate a paladin for bopping skeletons on the head with a sledgehammer?
Ok, works for me. Sounds like a damn good idea and something that is very much in the right direction for the paladin. Though I have to say that these need to be free feats that happen at 1,4,8,12. The paladin does not get enough feats over all to commit to that, though the bonuses that they give should be there for him.
I'm a big fan of alternate class abilities. I also think the paladin is quite powerful enough with all the changes. Those auras really start to help at higher levels. I think that paladins who want to focus on combat could lose their auras and replace them with feats like weapon focus or weapon spec. It's not quite a perfect trade off, but I'm worried about the power-creep with paladins. Plus, the restrictions on paladins aren't that restrictive in the hands of a good roleplayer (though they make many of the decisions in Pathfinder adventures interesting for PCs).
|
|
...neither the paladin I'm playing now, or the concept I seriously considered would be able to benefit from either the divine bond or the bonus feats you guys are talking about because I choose to make interesting and original characters. I'm starting to feel like people want their fantasy very vanilla mechanically.
We get that you want to play paladins of universal cosmic concepts, and I don't think anyone's ever argued against that. We simply refer to that term for the sake of saving space.
All it needs is a sentence or two (or sidebar) that clarify that 'all references to 'deity' should be taken to include core concepts such as Good, Law, The Seven Virtues, etc, for those who wish to play an ecumenical paladin, not a member of any specific Church'.
|
|
[B]UPDATE ALERT: A REVISED VERSION OF THE BETA PALADIN HAS BEEN POSTED BY JASON ON THIS THREAD.
Check it out, and save yourselves debating changes that have already occurred!
I wondered if my lack of enthusiasm for the Mettle feat was unfair, so I thought I'd come back to this thread started by its biggest fan (as far as I can tell) and really read the whole thing and see if there was something I was missing.
Unfortunately, the definition and discussion of Mettle is not here, and I have been more or less unsuccessful searching other threads and sources on the web. It sounds like a way for a paladin to avoid damage from a fireball just as a rogue using evasion, but without having to take evasive action, something rather like spell resistance, and helped by good will save.
But all that to the side, just my luck, this thread was a real treat to read. Kudos to Marty1000, whose history of the paladin is insightful and nostalgic. Thanks! And to the OP, I really hope the paladin gets the changes that make it a worthy class for everyone who contributed on this thread. I think I understand a little better now...
I wondered if my lack of enthusiasm for the Mettle feat was unfair, so I thought I'd come back to this thread started by its biggest fan (as far as I can tell) and really read the whole thing and see if there was something I was missing.
Unfortunately, the definition and discussion of Mettle is not here, and I have been more or less unsuccessful searching other threads and sources on the web. It sounds like a way for a paladin to avoid damage from a fireball just as a rogue using evasion, but without having to take evasive action, something rather like spell resistance, and helped by good will save.
But all that to the side, just my luck, this thread was a real treat to read. Kudos to Marty1000, whose history of the paladin is insightful and nostalgic. Thanks! And to the OP, I really hope the paladin gets the changes that make it a worthy class for everyone who contributed on this thread. I think I understand a little better now...
Hey man thank you for taking the time to read it all! I think this has been a great post and I hope it was well received by the devs.
Your description of Mettle is as close to accurate as I can tell. I have never read the exact definition of "Mettle" but from what I can gather, and what I would like to see it is as you described.
This has been a great thread to read peoples opinions and I hope the message got through!
|
|
I'm a big fan of alternate class abilities. I also think the paladin is quite powerful enough with all the changes. Those auras really start to help at higher levels. I think that paladins who want to focus on combat could lose their auras and replace them with feats like weapon focus or weapon spec. It's not quite a perfect trade off, but I'm worried about the power-creep with paladins. Plus, the restrictions on paladins aren't that restrictive in the hands of a good roleplayer (though they make many of the decisions in Pathfinder adventures interesting for PCs).
Dude do you play paladins? really, the auras help at high levels, great, do you start high level? I don't get it, every playtest that I've seen for the paladin, smites are missing at low levels to make the class feature useless, healing isn't enough to maintain parity. great the class starts to even out past level 10 low levels, to bad you've been worse than a wizard for the past 10 levels (where the wizard is supposed to be a glass cannon) to get there and don't get the wizards godly power.
On an unrelated note I gotta say I love the new lay on hands mechanic, too bad the new channel energy nerfs your healing power. And I love the AC boost to smite, but hate that the much needed damage boost is limited to demons/undead.
but hate that the much needed damage boost is limited to demons/undead.
If we could get them to add in an always on mechanic this would probably fix that problem. Or as you suggested just give the 1D6/2 levels against everything. but even then I think we should see something "always on".
Even with the improvements to smite you are still limited to just a fraction of your day where you can actually do some real damage to something evil. There should be a small scaling boost to the paladin's damage against all evil all day. I am not going to stop fighting for this, it will probably not happen but I can not stress it enough how much of a good thing this would be for the paladin.
Also another shameless plug for Mettle...makes so much sense!
|
Contributor, RPG Superstar 2008 Top 4, Legendary Games
|
I wondered if my lack of enthusiasm for the Mettle feat was unfair, so I thought I'd come back to this thread started by its biggest fan (as far as I can tell) and really read the whole thing and see if there was something I was missing.
Unfortunately, the definition and discussion of Mettle is not here, and I have been more or less unsuccessful searching other threads and sources on the web. It sounds like a way for a paladin to avoid damage from a fireball just as a rogue using evasion, but without having to take evasive action, something rather like spell resistance, and helped by good will save.
But all that to the side, just my luck, this thread was a real treat to read. Kudos to Marty1000, whose history of the paladin is insightful and nostalgic. Thanks! And to the OP, I really hope the paladin gets the changes that make it a worthy class for everyone who contributed on this thread. I think I understand a little better now...
Hey man thank you for taking the time to read it all! I think this has been a great post and I hope it was well received by the devs.
Your description of Mettle is as close to accurate as I can tell. I have never read the exact definition of "Mettle" but from what I can gather, and what I would like to see it is as you described.
This has been a great thread to read peoples opinions and I hope the message got through!
Wait, all this time you've been pimpin' for paladins to get Mettle, and you don't even know what it does? WTF?
For the record, PF paladins can't get "Mettle" per se, because it is non-OGL. It appears in Oriental Adventures (sohei) and Complete Warrior (hexblade) and Complete Divine (pious templar). I have no interest in indulging a legalist debate, but it's not in the SRD is all I'm sayin'.
Now, that stated, what the ability does is this:
When you succeed at a Fort or Will save against a spell that normally causes a reduced effect, you instead are unaffected.
It is essentially an analogue to Evasion but for Fort and Will saves.
It's less useful that it seems at first, because the majority of Fort or Will save effects are "save negates" effects, but there are enough things out there to make it still useful in some cases, esp. if you aer fighting evil clerics. Say, for example, vs. cause fear, fear, phantasmal killer, weird (though all of these are irrelevant to the pally with his aura of courage), inflict wounds, slay living, finger of death, destruction.
Mettle does sometimes cause arguments, though, when you have an effect that does something like sound burst - it does 1d8 damage (no save against damage) and a Fort save or be stunned for 1 round.
By rule, this is a "Fort partial" effect, so it is completely negated. Some people I've talked to in the past think that's bogus, that in effect the part you save against should be considered separately from the part that you don't. The literal rules don't agree, but I'm just saying I have seen arguments over the point.
Anyway, so that's Mettle. Now that you know what it is, are you still gung ho for it as a paladin ability? It seems like a fine enough fit, but I don't think it's the paladin's defense that are hurting anyway. It's the offense that needs help. Given the choice, I'd rather see more offense than worry about adding something like Mettle to an already strong defensive class.
Wait, all this time you've been pimpin' for paladins to get Mettle, and you don't even know what it does? WTF?
I obviously did not put that in the proper context. What I meant to say was that I have never read the description of Mettle from the books. But from everything I have read here on the boards (which broke it down just like you did many times) it seemed like an obvious fit for me.
I am on the same page as you as far as the paladin needing more offense than he does Defense. I think if you look around you will see that I am one of the biggest advocates for some form of always on damage. This should not equal the fighters always on damage and should probably be limited to "against evil" but it should be there.
Now as in regards to Mettle. I dont care if they can use it with the name or not and yea I dont have all the splat books in the world to have been able to read every detail in the game. But the definition of this ability really felt pretty cut and dry to me, that is why I have been an advocate for it.
Paladins should be able to stand in the flame and not get burned. They should be able to stand when all others have fallen to the evil clerics magics. This is how I see this ability and if I am wrong in my description then please feel free to insert any word you would like to show that what I have been "gung ho" for is something like this, called Mettle or not.